THE Federal Court has reserved its judgment in the final appeals of six men convicted and sentenced to death for the 2015 murder of deputy public prosecutor Datuk Anthony Kevin Morais, whose body was discovered encased in a concrete-filled drum.
Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, who presided over a three-member bench, said the court required time to deliberate and would fix a date for the verdict at a later time. Sitting alongside her were Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim and Federal Court judge Datuk Rhodzariah Bujang.
Bernama cited today that the panel resumed hearing the appeals of former military pathologist Colonel Dr R. Kunaseegaran, 62, money lender S. Ravi Chandran, 54, and four unemployed individuals — R. Dinishwaran, 33; A.K. Thinesh Kumar, 32; M. Vishwanath, 35; and S. Nimalan, 32 — following earlier sessions held on 13 March and 23 April this year.
All six were found guilty and handed the death penalty by the Kuala Lumpur High Court in July 2020. Their appeals were subsequently dismissed by the Court of Appeal in March last year, prompting the current proceedings at the Federal Court.
The murder occurred between 7am and 8pm on 4 September 2015 at a location along Jalan Dutamas Raya, Sentul, and Jalan USJ 1/6D, Subang Jaya. Morais, aged 55 at the time, had last been seen leaving his condominium at Menara Duta, Kuala Lumpur, en route to the Attorney-General’s Chambers in Putrajaya. His body was discovered on 16 September in a concrete-filled drum at Persiaran Subang Mewah, Subang Jaya.
During today’s hearing, Deputy Public Prosecutor Datuk Yusaini Amer Abdul Karim opposed a defence submission by Nimalan’s counsel seeking the application of the "dual crimes principle", as practised in Singapore.
He argued that the legal principles from the Singaporean cases ‘Daniel Vijay Katherasan and others v PP (2010)’ and ‘PP v Azlin Bte Arjunah and others (2022)’ should not be adopted in Malaysia, stating, “These principles are not binding on Malaysian courts and could make it more difficult to convict groups for crimes committed collectively.”
Yusaini added that forensic evidence clearly linked Nimalan to the crime. “There was a plastic bag in the vehicle driven by Nimalan which contained the deceased’s DNA. A T-shirt recovered also contained DNA from Nimalan, Ravi Chandran, and the deceased,” he said.
“Based on all the evidence presented, we submit that the sixth accused (Nimalan) clearly acted in furtherance of a common intention to commit the murder.”
In response, Nimalan’s lawyer, Amer Hamzah Arshad, urged the court to consider the dual crimes doctrine, pointing out that evidence showed the initial plan, discussed a day prior, involved only abduction, not murder.
He contended, “Nimalan should have been charged with abduction or disposing of evidence — not murder.” - May 14, 2025
